In this written homework I will use the term “globalization” to “describe the growth and
spread in investment, trade, and production, the introduction of new technology, and the
spread of democracy around the world”. (ibid. 2003: 1). It has to be noticed that this economic
globalization “would affect not only production, finance, technology, media and fashion,
but also the international political system, leading also to a globalization of democracy“
(Archibugi 2004: 438) Here it is important to note, that on the one hand I support the claim
that the ideas of democracy are globalized, on the other hand , however, there has to be kept
in mind, the constraint that democracy is only global as a formal or structural blueprint. The
flexible characteristics and focuses of democracy differ in many ways; therefore it is not possible
to state that an all-embracing final democratic model exists.
According to Pauly the impact of globalization shortens national capacities so that they become
“inefficient regulators of markets that cross their borders, ..” (Pauly 2000: 4) This
raises questions about the democratic legitimacy of an increasingly internationally operating
government and international institutions with an indefinite and not clearly defined designation
of legitimacy caused by a weak democratic proportion on a global level.
Additionally one can observe a rapidly growing number of non-state actors and rising influence
like TNCs and NGOs. Approaches concerning the processing of these topics are described
under the wide field of “global governance”.The theoretical discussion and their discourse offer help to take a look on today’s institutionsand their problems, the role of the state and the possible implementation approaches of theoretical ideas towards a democratic form of global governance. One solution, obviously, would be a transfer of states´ sovereignty to a regional or global level.
I will concentrate on the confrontation of two basic models of democracy beyond the nationstate,
the Cosmopolitan Democracy and the Deliberative Democracy. Based on different normative
assumptions they have different ideas of how to create a more adequate form of governance.
I will present both concepts separately followed by an all-embracing valuation and a
conclusion.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Cosmopolitan Democracy
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The „principle of autonomy“
2.3 Democratic public law
3 Deliberative Democracy
3.1 Deliberation
3.2 Public Spheres
4 Cosmopolitan Democracy vs. Deliberative Democracy?
4.1 Mode of legitimacy – Input/output.
4.2 Principle of differentiation – functional/sectoral
4.3 Political Style – Horizontal/Hierarchical
5 Final Comparison and Evaluation
Research Objectives and Themes
The paper examines the feasibility of democratic governance at a global level by critically comparing two competing theoretical frameworks: Cosmopolitan Democracy and Deliberative Democracy.
- Impact of economic globalization on state sovereignty and democratic legitimacy.
- Theoretical foundations of Cosmopolitan Democracy, specifically the "principle of autonomy" and global public law.
- The concept of "public spheres" and the role of discursive processes in Deliberative Democracy.
- Comparative assessment based on legitimacy modes, differentiation principles, and political styles.
- Evaluation of the practical implementation challenges, including the necessity of a shared global identity.
Excerpt from the Book
2.3 Democratic public law
Held states that before a democratic good like the public law can be created, it has to be ensured that it preserves the “seven clusters of rights“ which are the basic requirements for political participation: “health, social, cultural, civic, economic, pacific and political rights.” (ibid. 1995: 191)
A democratic public law within nation-states defines the common structure of action saving peoples rights. It is “a legal structure, moreover, which recognized citizens in their capacity of citizens in and across the seven domains of power justifiably be regarded as democratic public law.” (ibid. 1995: 200)
This “foundation of autonomy” (ibid. 1995: 222) is absolutely necessary for democratic adjustment of a state. But now, as mentioned in the introduction, democratic states act more and more on a global level by economic agreements with other states or though international organization. Additionally states are confronted with a diverse mixture of influences concerning ideas which influence democratic public law as well.
For Held, national communities “have been shaped by multiple interaction networks over time. “ (ibid. 1995: 225) So an isolated state does not and did not exist. Thus democratic public law both within and between political communities has to be created: The “cosmopolitan democratic law” transcends national borders and is based on the principle of autonomy to everyone in a “cosmopolitan democratic community.” Held talks about „cosmopolitan democratic law“ (ibid. 1995: 226 et seqq.).
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter contextualizes democracy within the pressures of globalization and defines the scope of the study as a confrontation between Cosmopolitan and Deliberative models.
2 Cosmopolitan Democracy: This section details David Held’s concept of a multilevel democratic order based on the "principle of autonomy" and the necessity of establishing a global democratic public law.
3 Deliberative Democracy: This chapter explores the alternative approach of discursive democracy, focusing on the role of public deliberation and the formation of public spheres to reach binding decisions.
4 Cosmopolitan Democracy vs. Deliberative Democracy?: This comparative analysis evaluates both models against specific benchmarks like input/output legitimacy, differentiation, and political style to assess their global applicability.
5 Final Comparison and Evaluation: The conclusion weighs the strengths and weaknesses of both theories, ultimately suggesting that Deliberative Democracy offers a more pragmatically grounded path for regulating global politics.
Keywords
Global Governance, Cosmopolitan Democracy, Deliberative Democracy, Globalization, Principle of Autonomy, Democratic Legitimacy, Public Sphere, Input-Output Legitimacy, Political Power, Accountability, Discursive Democracy, Non-state Actors, Sovereignty, Global Frameworks, Political Participation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper investigates how democratic systems can be maintained or adapted in the face of increasing globalization, specifically comparing two major theoretical models.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include the transformation of the nation-state, global accountability, the legitimacy of international institutions, and the role of civil society in transnational political processes.
What is the research goal of this work?
The author aims to determine which of the two models—Cosmopolitan or Deliberative Democracy—offers a more convincing and feasible framework for addressing the challenges of governing on a global scale.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The work utilizes a comparative political theory approach, operationalizing the two models against specific assessment criteria including legitimacy, differentiation, and political style.
What does the main body cover?
The main body systematically analyzes the theoretical foundations of both concepts, followed by a detailed comparative evaluation using benchmarks for appropriate governance beyond the nation-state.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Keywords include Global Governance, Cosmopolitan Democracy, Deliberative Democracy, Sovereignty, and Democratic Legitimacy.
Why does the author consider the title of chapter 4 problematic?
The author notes that the title "Cosmopolitan Democracy vs. Deliberative Democracy?" is misleading as it suggests an absolute polarization, whereas both theories actually share common underlying assumptions.
What is the author's final verdict on the practical feasibility of these models?
The author argues that while Cosmopolitan Democracy provides a valuable normative framework, it remains too abstract and "spongy." Deliberative Democracy is presented as more appropriate for current global politics as it better accommodates diverse interests without necessitating a pre-existing universal identity.
- Quote paper
- Thilo Schneider (Author), 2006, Democracy on a global level - feasible or utopian? Cosmopolitan Democracy vs. Deliberative Democracy?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/68896
